Top 1 Percent Control 42 Percent of Financial Wealth in the U.S.

[kelvin070]

This is a good read for you guys.

Many Americans are not buying the recent stock market rally. This is being reflected in multiple polls showing negative attitudes towards the economy and Wall Street. Wall Street is so disconnected from the average American that they fail to see the 27 million unemployed and underemployed Americans that now have a harder time believing the gospel of financial engineering prosperity. Americans have a reason to be dubious regarding the recovery because jobs are the main push for most Americans. A recent study shows that over 70 percent of Americans derive their monthly income from an actual W-2 job. In other words, working is the prime mover and source of their income. Yet the financial elite have very little understanding of this concept. Why? 42 percent of financial wealth is controlled by the top 1 percent. We would need to go back to the Great Depression to see such lopsided data.

Top 1 Percent Control 42 Percent of Financial Wealth in the U.S. – How Average Americans are Lured into Debt Servitude by Promises of Mega Wealth. | FedUpUSA

 

[Accountable]

Question: is your success dependent on the relative success of others?

 

[edgray]

Question: is your success dependent on the relative success of others?

are you talking about Rand's trickle down effect here?

 

[Meirionnydd]

are you talking about Rand's trickle down effect here?

Or as George Bush Senior called it, 'voodoo economics'.

 

[edgray]

Or as George Bush Senior called it, 'voodoo economics'.

sounds about right...

 

[Accountable]

Question: is your success dependent on the relative success of others?

are you talking about Rand's trickle down effect here?

Not on purpose. Not really sure what you're referring to. Ayn Rand? I confess I haven't read her, only heard about her views 2nd hand.

No, I was referring to pointing toward so much wealth being held by so few and implying that it means the rest are destitute, which we're not. My success, my happiness is independent of Steve Forbes' billions.

 

[edgray]

Not on purpose. Not really sure what you're referring to. Ayn Rand? I confess I haven't read her, only heard about her views 2nd hand.

No, I was referring to pointing toward so much wealth being held by so few and implying that it means the rest are destitute, which we're not. My success, my happiness is independent of Steve Forbes' billions.

Rand's "trickle down" effect is the justification for free-market, unrestricted capitalism. The theory goes that the success of the lower echelons of society is directly tied to the success of those at the top - that is, the wealth of those at the top "trickles down" through society. The top earners have a good year and therefore those below them have a good year too.

 

[kelvin070]

Rand's "trickle down" effect is the justification for free-market, unrestricted capitalism. The theory goes that the success of the lower echelons of society is directly tied to the success of those at the top - that is, the wealth of those at the top "trickles down" through society. The top earners have a good year and therefore those below them have a good year too.

Don't forget to discount the Peter Principle - In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.

 

[edgray]

don't forget to discount the peter principle - in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.

:24: :24: :24:

 

[Accountable]

Rand's "trickle down" effect is the justification for free-market, unrestricted capitalism. The theory goes that the success of the lower echelons of society is directly tied to the success of those at the top - that is, the wealth of those at the top "trickles down" through society. The top earners have a good year and therefore those below them have a good year too.

Oh, the macro level. Yes, of course. A rising tide lifts all boats.
In this case, though, I'm speaking of the micro-level.

Both you and kelvin have posted since my question. Isn't anyone even going to touch it?



eta:

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.

You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.

You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.

http://www.offtopicz.net/56009-10-cannots.html#post1415236
​

 

[edgray]

Question: is your success dependent on the relative success of others?

Ok I'll have a go at this one.

Yes. Being a member of society means that our success is dependent on that of those around us, on one level or another. No one's actions within a society are independent - our actions will always effect those around us.

By this score, this is the problem I have with capitalistic economic models - people at the bottom are supposed to be grateful for the success of those on top - "it's better for everyone" if the top do well.

But then no one gives a shit about how the bottom do - as soon as they struggle, it's their fault.

Capitalism divides us, pits us against one another, tells us we're all islands and individuals whilst we're all being screwed by those on top.

So yes, my success is dependent on the relative success of others. It's also, to a lesser extent, out of my control because of the success of others.

The recent economic crisis is a prime example - those at the top have still done ok, the bankers are still getting their ridiculous bonuses for doing nothing, whilst everyone has been totally screwed over.

So it works in the opposite way too - their success can still mean out failure.

 

[darkcgi]

Ive been seeing thing this commin on for the past 4 years
to get eveyones ideas straight or you dont know about it or dont care
watch V for Vendetta the movie and its pretty much a highlight of what is going on in the US

 

[edgray]

Ive been seeing thing this commin on for the past 4 years
to get eveyones ideas straight or you dont know about it or dont care
watch V for Vendetta the movie and its pretty much a highlight of what is going on in the US

how funny, I just made a comment about that film - it's what's happening in Britain, but the consitution protects the US from this kind of thing:

http://www.offtopicz.net/56621-americans-brainwashed.html#post1436743

 

[kelvin070]

There is a saying "success breeds success". The rich usually gets richer and the poor gets poorer. It all boils down to mindset. The rich will be more positive, lookout and grab hold of opportunities. The poor will be negative. On the other hand many don't want to get involved in the rat race. The bottom line is there must be a level playing field for all without any obstacles if people wish to move forward.

 

[Accountable]

Ok I'll have a go at this one.

Yes. Being a member of society means that our success is dependent on that of those around us, on one level or another. No one's actions within a society are independent - our actions will always effect those around us.

By this score, this is the problem I have with capitalistic economic models - people at the bottom are supposed to be grateful for the success of those on top - "it's better for everyone" if the top do well.

But then no one gives a shit about how the bottom do - as soon as they struggle, it's their fault.

Capitalism divides us, pits us against one another, tells us we're all islands and individuals whilst we're all being screwed by those on top.

So yes, my success is dependent on the relative success of others. It's also, to a lesser extent, out of my control because of the success of others.

The recent economic crisis is a prime example - those at the top have still done ok, the bankers are still getting their ridiculous bonuses for doing nothing, whilst everyone has been totally screwed over.

So it works in the opposite way too - their success can still mean out failure.

It's sad that you have so little faith in yourself. You're not a leaf in a stream. How did the people at the top get there? How did Oprah Winfrey go from a poverty-stricken black girl in the whites-only rural Deep South to become one of the richest most powerful people in America? I'm guessing she didn't just bump into it lucky and somebody dropped a billion dollars in her lap.

I define my success by what I can do. If something gets in the way of what I want, I do a realistic assessment and make adjustments. I don't look at a mansion and get pissed at the owner because I don't own it.

 

[edgray]

It's sad that you have so little faith in yourself. You're not a leaf in a stream. How did the people at the top get there? How did Oprah Winfrey go from a poverty-stricken black girl in the whites-only rural Deep South to become one of the richest most powerful people in America? I'm guessing she didn't just bump into it lucky and somebody dropped a billion dollars in her lap.

I define my success by what I can do. If something gets in the way of what I want, I do a realistic assessment and make adjustments. I don't look at a mansion and get pissed at the owner because I don't own it.

I have faith in myself. And I also don't look at mansion and get pissed off because I don't own it. I get pissed off that anyone owns it. Oprah Winfrey is a good example of how the wrong people get rewarded in capitalist systems. Why should she, who doesn't contribute anything to society directly apart from pointless rhetoric, completely false psychological information and celebrity interviews.

I'm simply a cog in a very broken machine, just like everyone else.

 

[Accountable]

There is a saying "success breeds success". The rich usually gets richer and the poor gets poorer. It all boils down to mindset. The rich will be more positive, lookout and grab hold of opportunities. The poor will be negative. On the other hand many don't want to get involved in the rat race. The bottom line is there must be a level playing field for all without any obstacles if people wish to move forward.

What??? :eek
Why???

Why should I be able go to the track and tell everyone in the race that they have to slow down because I feel like walking? That doesn't make any sense at all.

This guy has a negative attitude about himself, so he deserves part of what the optimistic guy earns. Yeh, that'll help. That'll make the negative guy feel better about himself.

This guy doesn't feel like doing the hard work required to earn the big paycheck and get the corner office, so he deserves part of that executive's pay. He probably could be earning that much if he wanted to, so he should get it.

What the fuck??!?


Look up a few biographies of the truly mega-rich self-made people. Most started broke and failed several times, losing one fortune after another, in getting to "the top."

 

[kelvin070]

What??? :eek
Why???

Why should I be able go to the track and tell everyone in the race that they have to slow down because I feel like walking? That doesn't make any sense at all.

This guy has a negative attitude about himself, so he deserves part of what the optimistic guy earns. Yeh, that'll help. That'll make the negative guy feel better about himself.

This guy doesn't feel like doing the hard work required to earn the big paycheck and get the corner office, so he deserves part of that executive's pay. He probably could be earning that much if he wanted to, so he should get it.

What the fuck??!?


Look up a few biographies of the truly mega-rich self-made people. Most started broke and failed several times, losing one fortune after another, in getting to "the top."

Those mega rich were at the right place at the right time and they seized the opportunity. Its not abt telling people to slow down. Its abt bridging the wide income gap and the well off could play some part to narrow the gap.

 

[nova]

I have faith in myself. And I also don't look at mansion and get pissed off because I don't own it. I get pissed off that anyone owns it. Oprah Winfrey is a good example of how the wrong people get rewarded in capitalist systems. Why should she, who doesn't contribute anything to society directly apart from pointless rhetoric, completely false psychological information and celebrity interviews.

And who exactly are you to decide for everyone what value someone else brings to "society" ?

Continuing on with the Oprah example, "society" obviously thinks she provides enough value to continue to give her money to do what she does. You may not personally find any value in her brand and style of entertainment but there are plenty of people who do and its the height of arrogance to tell everybody else that essentially "you're thinking wrong, you should follow my definition of value."

Hell, I think we've had this conversation before about the issues arbitrarily deciding and enforcing by fiat what value to assign to the work each individual does. Such arrangements assume that one or two people at the top can have more and better information and make better decisions than all the other millions of people out in the world combined, which is quite honestly ludicrous...

 

[edgray]

And who exactly are you to decide for everyone what value someone else brings to "society" ?

An active member of society. Come on, are you really going to argue that Oprah contributes necessary work to society???!!! :24:

I mean really, it's just common sense. Stuff that's necessary is something that society couldn't do without. Not something that I just arbitrarily decide. Does Oprah fit that bill?

Continuing on with the Oprah example, "society" obviously thinks she provides enough value to continue to give her money to do what she does. You may not personally find any value in her brand and style of entertainment but there are plenty of people who do and its the height of arrogance to tell everybody else that essentially "you're thinking wrong, you should follow my definition of value."

You said it all there. Entertainment. And for that she's a multimillionaire. Yeah, that's great. Top notch value!

Hell, I think we've had this conversation before about the issues arbitrarily deciding and enforcing by fiat what value to assign to the work each individual does. Such arrangements assume that one or two people at the top can have more and better information and make better decisions than all the other millions of people out in the world combined, which is quite honestly ludicrous...

That's exactly the system we have now - those at the top deciding they're contributing more and taking more out of the pot. That's exactly what I DO NOT believe in.